Capítulo 7 Vieses metodológicos
7.4 Diretrizes para redação
7.4.1 Quais são as diretrizes para redação de análises de vieses metodológicos?
PROBAST: A Tool to Assess the Risk of Bias and Applicability of Prediction Model Studies.49
RoB 2: A Revised Tool for Assessing Risk of Bias in Randomized Trials.50
AMSTAR 2: A Critical Appraisal Tool for Systematic Reviews that Include Randomised or Non-Randomised Studies of Healthcare Interventions51
ROBINS-I: A Tool for Assessing Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions.52
ROBIS: A New Tool to Assess Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews53
QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies54
Citar como:
Ferreira, Arthur de Sá. Ciência com R: Perguntas e respostas para pesquisadores e analistas de dados. Rio de Janeiro: 1a edição,
Ferreira, Arthur de Sá. Ciência com R: Perguntas e respostas para pesquisadores e analistas de dados. Rio de Janeiro: 1a edição,
Referências
49.
Wolff RF, Moons KGM, Riley RD, et al. PROBAST: A Tool to Assess the Risk of Bias and Applicability of Prediction Model Studies. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2019;170(1):51–58. doi:10.7326/m18-1376
50.
Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. agosto 2019:l4898. doi:10.1136/bmj.l4898
51.
Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ. setembro 2017:j4008. doi:10.1136/bmj.j4008
52.
Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. outubro 2016:i4919. doi:10.1136/bmj.i4919
53.
Whiting P, Savović J, Higgins JPT, et al. ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2016;69:225–234. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.06.005
54.
Whiting PF, Rutjes AWS, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2011;155(8):529–536. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009